This section describes the environmental documentation requirements for Federal Aid ITD projects. Detailed guidance is given for the major steps in the environmental review process. The section focuses on documentation and procedural requirements:

Ø Documents and procedures required for three classes of projects: those Categorically Excluded from environmental impact statement requirements (CE), those requiring an Environmental Assessment (EA), and those requiring an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

Ø Specific guidance for an EA

Ø Specific guidance for NEPA EISs.

Ø Preparation of the NEPA document

Ø Standards applicable to all environmental documents.

Ø Guidance for Section 4(f), Section 106 evaluations, reevaluations and supplementary documents.

Overall guidance on NEPA documentation requirements is online at FHWA’s web site: (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ Click on FHWA Programs, then Environment, then NEPA, then NEPA: Document Development Process, then Documentation or http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/nepa/document.htm , or- http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/guidebook/vol2/doc9a.pdf )

310.01 Abbreviations and Acronyms. Abbreviations and acronyms used in this section are listed in Section 200.01. Others are found in the general list in the appendix.

310.02 Glossary. Discipline Report - A Discipline Report is simply a convenient name for the various reports that are required for an Environmental Document. For instance, a noise report, a wetland report, an EJ report, etc., are all Discipline Reports. The term is being used in this manual to encompass the series of reports being discussed in a particular narrative instead of listing each report by name.

For an additional glossary of terms used in this section, see Section 200.01.

Section 320.00 - Document Standards

This section covers standards for documents prepared in the environmental analysis and review process.

320.01 Level of Detail. All NEPA environmental documents should be as concise as possible. For a NEPA EIS, the main body of text for average proposals should not exceed 150 pages. A NEPA EIS of unusual scope or complexity should not exceed 300 pages (40 CFR 1502.7). CEQ guidelines indicate that an Environmental Assessment (EA) should not be over 15 pages, excluding appendices. The level of detail provided for each element of the environment analyzed should be commensurate with the significance of its impact.

Impacts and alternatives should be discussed only to the level of detail appropriate to the level of affect for the proposal. The EA discussion of alternatives should be limited to a general discussion of the impacts of the alternatives, including any required mitigation measures. Typically a no-build alternative and a preferred alternative are sufficient for an EA. Additional alternatives should be included based on their appropriateness in meeting the stated purpose and need. In some cases the build/no-build alternatives are sufficient to meet consideration requirements. Any time there are two or more alternatives that meet the purpose and need of the project, each alternative must be discussed in detail. The level of information is also dictated by the amount of design effort required to determine the footprint of the proposal. The project footprint, or area, allows the type, size, and location of the facility to be identified, which determines the scope of analysis of the impacts.

For a draft EIS, all reasonable alternatives under consideration (including no-build) need to be developed to a comparable level of detail in the draft EIS so their comparative merits may be evaluated (40 CFR 1502.14(b) and (d)). An exception to the comparable level of detail is described in FHWA Technical Advisory T 6640.8A (Exhibit 300-4), Section V, Part E. Alternatives: “Development of more detailed design for some aspects (e.g., Section 4(f), COE or CG permits, noise, wetlands) of one or more alternatives may be necessary during preparation of the draft and final EIS to evaluate impacts or mitigation measures or to address issues raised by other agencies or the public.”

320.02 Using Existing Documents. NEPA/CEQ regulations allow the use of existing documents to reduce duplication and unnecessary paperwork. If an analysis has already been done for the proposed project or a similar project, it does not need to be duplicated. Existing documents can be used in any of the following ways:

Ø Adoption (CEQ 40 CFR 1506.3).

Ø Addendum (CEQ 40 CFR 1502.9).

Ø Incorporation by reference (CEQ 40 CFR 1502.21).

Ø Supplemental EIS (CEQ 40 CFR 1502.9).

This is an important aspect of gathering environmental data that is often overlooked. The consultant that prepares any environmental document should include a list of literature searched for baseline data. If any of this literature is pertinent to the project, incorporate the document by reference or as an appendix if it is especially useful.

The District Environmental Planner may wish to conduct a literature search prior to engaging a consultant. If there is sufficient published literature to cover the impacts of the project, reference the information in a narrative, add a cover letter to that information and submit that to ITD HQ Environmental Section as the BE/BA even as an EA if the information is of great enough detail..

320.03 EIS Format Standards. ITD has developed publication format standards so the department can prepare an EIS that is consistent in appearance and easy to read and reference (see Section 300.06). These standards must be followed when preparing an ITD EIS, unless the Environmental Section Manager approves an exception. FHWA guidelines describe three options for preparing a NEPA Final EIS: traditional, condensed, and abbreviated. [See FHWA Technical Advisory T 6640.8A (Exhibit 300-4) and. http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/508/508law.html ]

320.04 Tri-Message Page. On the back of the EIS/EA title page, or within any document that is typically available to or reviewed by the public, three standard messages should be displayed:

• Information access for people with disabilities (ADA requirement).

• Assurance of compliance with the Civil Rights Act, Title VI.

• Note on units of measurement (English or metric) – now optional since metric units are no longer required by FHWA.

320.04.01 Information Access for Persons with Disabilities. Below is a notice that is to be included in all environmental documents distributed to the public. This notice should be on a separate page, immediately following the title page of the EIS or EA, and in larger type than the rest of the document. Refer to the “Tri-Message Page” on Exhibit 300-1, page 27. Also (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ Click on Legislation and Regulations, then FHWA Directives and Policy Memorandums, then FHWA Technical Advisories, then T6640.8A.)

Persons with disabilities may request this information be prepared and supplied in alternate forms by calling the ITD District Environmental Office at xxx-xx-xxxx* or ITD Headquarters Environmental Office at 208-343-8842.

For general information, this ADA message pertains to advertising a public meeting or written material such as a newsletter:

“The site is accessible to persons with disabilities. Individuals requiring reasonable accommodation may request written materials in alternative formats, sign language interpreters, physical accessibility accommodations, or other reasonable accommodation by calling the ITD District Environmental Office at (Insert the local District Office number) or ITD Headquarters Environmental Office at 208-343-8842.

320.04.02 Civil Rights Assurance.

Include the following statement:

“Idaho State Department of Transportation (ITD) hereby gives public notice that it is the policy of the department to assure full compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987, Executive Order 12898, and the related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. Title VI requires that no person in the United States of America shall, on the grounds of race, color, sex, national origin, or low income, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity for which ITD receives federal financial assistance.”

320.04.03 Metric Measurement Units.

ITD’s current policy is to require only English units of measurement. FHWA no longer requires use of metric units for environmental documents and Section 4(f) Evaluations published under FHWA rules. Since federal and state permitting agencies are not accustomed to working in metric units, all permit drawings will submitted in English units with no reference to metric equivalence. NOAA Fisheries Service accepts either metric or English units for Biological Evaluations/Biological Assessments.

ASTM E 380-92 is recommended as a source of information on metric conversion. When both measures are used, the English unit should come first, followed by the metric unit in parenthesis; for example: “The HOV lane is separated from adjacent lanes by a designated buffer width of 2 to 4 ft (0.6 to 1.2 m).

320.05 Availability and Cost of Environmental Documents. The lead agency shall retain NEPA documents and make them available to the public in accordance with 23 CFR 771.119(e) and (f), 23 CFR 771.123(g), and 23 CFR 771.125(g). Normally, copies are furnished free of charge. With FHWA concurrence, parties requesting an EIS may be charged a fee not to exceed the actual cost of reproducing the document.

ITD practice is that copies of all environmental documents are distributed during the initial circulation free of charge. Requests for documents received after the initial circulation, or for additional copies of a document, may be subject to a fee not to exceed the actual cost of reproducing the document.

If a fee is charged for a document, the document should include the following statement: “The cost of this document is $____, which does not exceed the cost of printing.”

The document should include a statement that “This document is available for public review at the following locations…” such as ITD District Office, DEQ, ITD Headquarters, FHWA or other federal agency offices, public libraries, and city or county government offices. Preliminary environmental documents are not subject to Freedom of Information Act requirements for public disclosure. For preliminary review, a DEIS or FEIS is distributed for agency review prior to release of the DEIS or FEIS to the public.

Pursuant to FHWA legal guidance, the following language should be added to the outside cover of a preliminary draft environmental document circulated for agency review:

“ITD and FHWA [co-lead agencies] have determined that the review comments on this preliminary document are an intergovernmental exchange that may be withheld under the Freedom of Information Act request. Premature release of this material to any segment of the public could give some sectors an unfair advantage and would have a ‘chilling effect’ on intergovernmental coordination and the success of the cooperating agency concept. For these reasons, we respectively request that the public not be given access to this document.”

320.06 Use of Consultant Logo. Neither ITD nor FHWA advertises or endorses any particular consultant firm. Consultant logos on any discipline reports, NEPA documents or 106/4(f) documents are acceptable only when the product is the intellectual property of the consultant or the consultant is liable for the contents. FHWA has sole responsibility for the content of final environmental documents for federally funded highway projects. It is for this reason that company trademarks and logos are not accepted. However, the name and qualifications of the discipline report author must be included within the body of the document. This requirement should be met by adding an appendix containing a brief resume (not over ½ page) of the qualifications and organizational affiliation of the author(s).

A consultant logo is not displayed on:

Ø Promotional material for an open house or other ITD event (e.g., pamphlets, displays, newsletter, flyers, ads).

Ø Studies (e.g., route development or corridor feasibility studies) that compile different discipline studies that reflect an ITD position on an issue.

Ø Environmental documents (such as an EIS, EA, or CE). These documents typically contain a compilation of discipline study results that may be extracted and displayed out of context. Without the logo, the consultant is released from liability for the environmental document.

320.06.01 Discipline Reports (BA’s, Wetland Reports, Noise Reports, etc.). The consultant is liable for the contents of the product until it is accepted by FHWA and it is inappropriate for ITD to change the report. ITD provides written comments on drafts for the consultant to address. If ITD staff disagrees with the report and modifies it, the consultant logo must come off and the ITD logo added. The following text is included in the title or cover page: “Prepared for the Federal Highway Administration.” Following this statement add a signatory line for the document author.

320.06.02 Environmental Documents. Consultant logos/names are appropriate only in an appendix titled “Studies Prepared By.” Reference is made to the consulting firm and the individual responsible for preparing the work. If the Discipline Report has been modified by ITD or FHWA, that modification should be noted in the consultant reference.

Section 330.00 - Documents and Procedures for Class II (CE) Projects

Actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant environmental effect, as defined in NEPA regulations, are excluded from requirements to prepare an EA or EIS. Such projects are classified as Categorical Exclusions. Those projects that qualify as categorical exclusions under NEPA are listed in 23 CFR 771.117.

330.01 Required Documentation.

NEPA

Projects meeting the CEQ and FHWA criteria for Categorical Exclusions (CEs) are listed in FHWA regulations (23 CFR 771.117 (c)). Projects that are categorically excluded under certain conditions and do not require further approval by FHWA or further federal environmental documentation are listed below (commonly called “c” list). Other actions, such as those listed in 23 CFR 771.117 (d), (commonly called a “d” list) may be classified as Documented CEs upon FHWA approval of the determinations made on the ITD Form 654 and accompanying documentation as described below. An action that would normally be classified as a CE may be classified as a DCE (or “d” list) if any of the following circumstances apply:

Ø Any federal lands are affected or impacted.

Ø A federal Corps of Engineers Section 10 or Section 404 (Nationwide or Individual) permit is required.

Ø Substantial or uncertain impact may occur on properties protected by Section 4(f) of the DOT Act or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. In such cases a separate Section 4(f), Section 106 evaluation, or Cultural Resource Survey and accompanying State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) concurrence is required. See Sections 1700 and Section 1800.

Ø Possible impact on habitat or species protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Supporting documentation is submitted to FWS for concurrence. The District Office identifies DCE projects that have received FWS concurrence when submitting the project design to the HQ ESO for approval.

The following actions meet the criteria for CEs in the CEQ regulation (Section 1508.4 Exhibit 300-3), and regulation 23 CFR 771.117(c) (“c” list) and do not normally require any further NEPA approvals by the FHWA.

1) Activities which do not involve or lead directly to construction,

2) Approval of utility installations along or across a transportation facility,

3) Construction of bicycle and pedestrian lanes, paths, and facilities,

4) Activities included in the State’s highway safety plan,

5) Transfer of federal lands when the subsequent action is not a FHWA action,

6) The installation of noise barriers or alterations to existing publicly-owned buildings to provide for noise reduction,

7) Landscaping,

8) Installation of fencing, signs, pavement markings, small passenger shelters, traffic signals, and railroad warning devices where no substantial land acquisition or traffic disruption will occur,

9) Emergency repairs under 23 U.S.C. 125,

10) Acquisition of scenic easements,

11) Determination of pay back for property previously acquired with federal-aid participation,

12) Improvements to existing rest areas and truck weigh stations,

13) Ridesharing activities,

14) Bus and rail car rehabilitation,

15) Alterations to facilities or vehicles to allow accessibility for elderly and handicapped persons,

16) Program administration, technical assistance, and operating assistance to transit authorities,

17) Purchase of vehicles by applicant where the use of these vehicles can be accommodated by existing facilities,

18) Railroad track and rail-bed maintenance and improvements when carried out within the existing highway right-of-way,

19) Purchase and installation or operation of maintenance equipment to be located within the transit facility, or

20) Promulgation of rules, regulations, and directives.

Projects qualifying as a Documented Categorically Exempt (DCE) under 23 CFR 771.117 (d) (“d” list) are as follows:

1) Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes;

2) Highway safety or traffic operation improvements;

3) Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement; or the construction of grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings,

4) Transportation corridor fringe parking;

5) Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas;

6) Approvals for disposal of excess right-of-way or joint or limited use of right-of-way;

7) Approvals for changes in access;

8) Construction of new bus storage;

9) Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings;

10) Construction of bus transfer facilities;

11) Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities; or

12) Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes.

Any of these projects may be classified as a Categorical Exclusion only after FHWA approval. These actions require that specific documentation be submitted to the FHWA to verify that specific conditions have been met to satisfy the requirements for a CE.

330.02 Public Notice. There are no public notice or hearing requirements for CEs. FHWA may call for a hearing if the need is warranted and in that case, standard hearing procedures are followed. The primary public notice goal is to inform the public when the work will occur and how to avoid routing problems. News releases and other appropriate public contact should begin shortly before construction. These communications should continue as needed during the construction period.

Section 340.0 - Documents and Procedures for Class III (EA) Projects

All EA documentation must comply with the requirements of NEPA and implementing regulations (CEQ 40 CFR 1501-1508 and FHWA 23 CFR 771.119 - 121).

340.01 Overview of NEPA EA

Ø Any ITD EA or EIS project that involves federal funding, federal lands, or federal permits must comply with the NEPA procedures listed below and described in detail in this section:

Ø Prepare the preliminary Environmental Assessment (EA) and Section 4(f) Evaluation if required (see Exhibit 300-1 and Section 1700.05).

Ø Publish a notice of availability and/or public hearing notice.

Ø Review and respond to comments and incorporate into Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The FONSI includes the Final 4(f) Evaluation, unless there is a programmatic 4(f); then a final 4(f) is not required.

Ø Submit to FHWA with request for a Finding of No Significant Impact.

Ø Notify agencies that FONSI is available.

340.02 Preliminary Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation. The District/Consultant prepares a preliminary EA as shown in Exhibit 300-1. Include an area map, vicinity map, site plan, photogrammetric maps (to depict the environmental setting), summaries of discipline reports, and any agency coordination letters such as endangered species listings, prime and unique farmland determinations, Section 106 tribal consultation, and archaeological/historic reports. If the project involves Section 4(f) lands, a separate evaluation is required and is included as a separate section in the EA. See Section 300.07 and Section 1700.05 for details.

The discipline reports themselves are attached to the Environmental Evaluation/Document forwarded to FHWA. A concise and complete summary of the report, its methodology and conclusions is included in the body text of the EE/EA to be submitted to FHWA.

340.02.01 Federal Agency Review. The preliminary EA and Section 4(f) evaluation are submitted to the FHWA for review and comment. If the reviewers determine that the proposal may have significant environmental impacts, the proposal is reevaluated to determine whether the significant impacts can be appropriately mitigated or eliminated. If the impacts cannot be eliminated, an EIS is required. If no significant impacts are found, the District Office makes any needed revisions and requests the FHWA agreement to publish a notice announcing the public availability of the EA. FHWA agreement is needed prior to publishing the documents and a 15 day period must elapse between publication of the document and the public hearing.

340.02.02 Public Review and Comment. The public review and comment period for an EA is a minimum of 30 days. If a Section 4(f) evaluation is included, a minimum of 45 days is required although the additional time is required for review by DOI and FHWA legal staff, not public review. Since the comment period (for scoping and hearings) remains open under NEPA until the FONSI or ROD is issued by the federal agency, it is ITD practice to use the term “comments are requested by (fill in date)” in advertisements and notices to ensure timely receipt of comments for meaningful consideration.

After the comment expiration date, ITD has the option to extend the comment period if requested by the public or another agency, and it is judged reasonable for meaningful submittal of project comments. Following notification only to the requesting party, no further public advertisement of the comment period extension is required. ITD practice is to advertise the availability of the EA and the public hearing, though there is no requirement to hold a hearing for EA documents. The document must be made available for public inspection at the District Office of ITD and the office of FHWA.

(1) Notice of Availability

The District publishes a notice in the newspaper of general circulation in the area where the project is located. The intent is to publish the notice in a paper with the most circulation in the area of the project. At times this might mean that the notice should be published in the local newspaper as well as the regional paper. For instance, a project in McCall may need to be published in the local paper as well as the Idaho Statesman since there are many Boise area residents with second homes in McCall.

The notice, similar to a public hearing notice, advises the public that the EA is available for review and comment and where the document may be obtained. It should briefly describe the proposed action and impacts identified in the assessment. The notice of the EA’s availability must be sent to affected units of federal, state, tribal, and local government.

(2) Public Hearing

Public hearings are not required for Class II projects, but may be requested by an agency or organization. If a request for a hearing can be anticipated, it is best to plan ahead rather than wait until the end of the comment period to start preparing for the hearing. Class II projects (CEs) are not required to have an approved Environmental Document to proceed with a hearing unless the hearing is requested by FHWA. For Class I and Class III projects the Environmental Document must be approved by FHWA before proceeding to a hearing.

In case of a 4(f) impact

Approval from FHWA includes a Legal Sufficiency review for the 4(f) documents. The 4(f) documents will be forwarded to the FHWA legal department for a determination if the documentation is sufficient to meet current legal standards. That clearance will require forty five days and that time should be anticipated in planning for the public hearing.

The public hearing notice requirements for public hearings follow the format and time schedule outlines in Appendix F of the Public Involvement Manual. The notice of the public hearing published in local newspapers announces the availability of the EA and where it can be obtained or reviewed.

(3) Document Distribution

The EA is distributed to any federal, state, or local agency or tribe known to have interest or special expertise in the areas addressed in the EA or that may be substantially affected by the project impact. For example, if Section 4(f) property is involved, the document is sent by the FHWA division office to the Department of the Interior and to the agency with jurisdiction over the property unless the action is covered by one of the 4(f) Programmatic exemptions. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries should be included in the distribution for projects that may affect wetlands or endangered species or critical habitat. If an individual Section 404, Section 10, or Section 9 (Coast Guard) permit is required, a copy of the EA should be sent to the agency. See also FHWA’s Technical Advisory T 6640.8A. (Exhibit 300-4) or http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/techadvs/t664008a.htm.

340.03 Final Environmental Assessment. (With or Without Section 4(f) Evaluation) At the conclusion of the public review period, the District Environmental Planner evaluates all comments received, including comments from public hearings, meetings, and open houses. The District Environmental Planner responds to the comments and revises the document as necessary, referencing changes in the EA resulting from the comments received during the public hearing process, and responding to those comments. The ITD HQ Environmental Manager reviews the Final EA, and requests a FONSI by letter to FHWA.

If the public review reveals significant impacts (or controversy), the federal agency may determine that an EIS is necessary (See Section 300.05). After FHWA issues the FONSI, the signed FONSI is returned to the ITD HQ Environmental Section with a letter that a FONSI is available from the federal lead agency

340.04 Issue FONSI (NEPA)

340.04.01 Contents.

Typical contents of a FONSI include:

Ø Cover (include Summary Statement of No Significant Impacts)

Ø Title Sheet (use EIS format– see Exhibit 300-4)

Ø Description of Proposed Action (recap from the EA)

Ø EA Coordination and Comments (list EA issue date, hearing date, and summary of comments)

Ø Supportive Environmental Findings such as:

BA Findings

Farmland Finding

Wetland Finding

Flood Plain Finding

Environmental Justice (Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations)

Ø Attachments (indicate that the EA and EA/design hearing transcript are incorporated by reference into this FONSI. Indicate where copies of both documents can be obtained).

Errata to EA and Hearing Transcript

Notice of Availability of FONSI and Notice of Adoption of EA with Publication

Listing (text of notice and newspaper listing for notice)

FONSI distribution list

Mitigation commitment list

Written comments with responses

Hearing comments with responses

For guidance on the form and process for a NEPA FONSI, see FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.08A. (Exhibit 300-4) and also http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ Click on Legislation and Regulations, then FHWA Directives and Policy Memorandums, then FHWA Technical Advisories, then T6640.8A.

340.04.02 Distribution. Federal regulations do not require formal distribution of a FONSI. Agencies must send a notice of the FONSI’s availability to federal, state, and local government agencies likely to have an interest in the project. Technical Advisory T6640.8A encourages the lead agency to inform commenting agencies (or those requesting to be informed) of the status of the project, the disposition of their comments and to provide them with a copy of the FONSI. ITD practice is to circulate the FONSI in the same manner as EAs and EISs. This distribution normally includes, but is not limited to:

Ø Any federal agency that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise in any environmental impact involved.

Ø Any appropriate federal, state, or local agency authorized to develop and enforce environmental standards.

Ø Any interested tribe.

Ø Any person, organization, or agency that requests a copy of the document.

Ø Public officials, private interest groups, and members of the public having or expressing an interest in the proposed project, for example by submitting a comment on the EA.

340.04.03 Additional Environmental Documentation. If additional environmental documentation is needed to support the FONSI, such as a preservation of farmlands determination, historical or cultural resource surveys, wetland reports, critical area analyses, or floodplain evaluations, the District requests the preparation of discipline reports and coordinates the processing of the reports to the appropriate agencies. The environmental documentation needed to support the FONSI must be prepared before the FONSI is issued. Informational copies are also sent to the ITD HQ Environmental Manager.

340.04.04 Public Review and Comment. Other agencies and the public are given an opportunity to comment through the public notice process. A criterion for determining when a comment period is required is stated in ITD’s public notice procedures, described in The ITD Public Information Manual (Chapter 3 & Appendix F) and includes:

Ø Publishing a notice in one or more newspapers of general circulation in the area where the project is located.

Ø Sending a copy of the FONSI to any agency, organization, or member of the public requesting information, in writing, concerning the project.

The FONSI is also sent for comment to any local agency or political subdivision that may be affected by the project. Agencies with jurisdiction and any interested also receive a copy for comment.

340.05 Mitigation Commitments. When NEPA proposals involve mitigation commitments, these commitments are recorded and completed as part of the project design file, as required. Typically the record is the Mitigation Plan that is developed during the preparation of the BA and the final Environmental Evaluation. The Mitigation Plan consists of all proposed mitigation measures, commitments made to resource agencies or other agencies with permitting authority, and any other mitigation commitment made on behalf of the project. When project documents reach headquarters, the Environmental Manager reviews the Mitigation Plan and the Final Design to determine if the mitigation commitments are included in the plans, Standard or Special Provisions and/or Contractors Notes.

Once an environmental commitment is made and accepted by FHWA, it cannot be changed or modified without FHWA approval.

340.06 Proceed with Design and Plans, Specifications, and Estimates. After all environmental documents and the project design file have been approved the project may advance to right of way acquisition and preparation of the plans, specifications, and estimate (PS&E). At this point, the District Environmental Manager should check to make certain the Mitigation Plan is included in the contract going out for bid.

Section 350.00 - Documents and Procedures for Class I Projects

This section is written primarily for preparation of an EIS but the guidance on document preparation generally applies to preparation of EA’s as well.

For projects requiring federal funds or federal permits, all EIS documentation must comply with the requirements of NEPA and implementing regulations (CEQ 40 CFR 1501-1508 and FHWA 23 CFR 771.123 - 125). On projects where one or more federal agencies have funding or permitting responsibility, one or more federal agencies may be lead agencies. Where Federal Highway funding is used, FHWA is the lead agency although other federal agencies may be involved as cooperating agencies. Projects jointly developed with other federal agencies are prepared to comply with that agency’s regulations and guidelines. For further guidance on preparing EISs, see FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8A. (See Exhibit 300-4).

NEPA Overview

An ITD Federal Aid project that anticipates substantial environmental, social, or economic impacts, and involves federal funding, federal lands, or federal permits, must comply with NEPA process and procedures for public involvement. This process requires a “systematic, interdisciplinary approach” for dealing with the permitting agencies. The requirement is met by ITD within the Merger Process. Currently the Merger Process is under review and may be changed substantially or replaced. This section will be updated as the changes occur. An overview of the current Merger Process and procedures is outlined below.

Ø * Hold merger confirmation meeting (i.e., meet with FHWA, ITD and FHWA to determine if merger is the best process for the project)

Ø *Establish interdisciplinary (merger I) approach and establish purpose and need (merger meeting)

Ø Publish Notice of Intent (NEPA)

Ø Begin 4(f) clearance

Ø Conduct scoping process

Ø Develop and apply screening criteria to alternatives developed so far

Ø *Select alternatives to study in DEIS and process final study plan (merger meeting II)

Ø Begin discipline studies

Ø Prepare draft EIS

Ø Circulate DEIS and file with impacted resource agencies

Ø Hold EIS/location public hearing if required or desired

Ø *Select preferred alternative and prepare Final EIS (merger meeting III)

Ø Issue Final EIS and file with resource agencies

Ø Prepare and issue Record of Decision (NEPA)

If the project is not covered under the Merger Process, the requirements listed under * must be met by means other than the Merger Process. The basic intent is to meet the requirements of NEPA to establish an interdisciplinary approach and work with all of those agencies and stakeholders directly impacted by the project.

350.01 Notices of Intent and Determination of Significance and Scoping.

350.01.01 Notice of Intent (NOI). If an EIS is required for a project involving federal funds or federal permits, the District Environmental Planner submits a Notice of Intent (NOI) to the federal lead agency for publication in the Federal Register. The NOI advises federal agencies that an EIS will be prepared. The contents and guidelines for the notice are found in FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8A. (Exhibit 300-4)

350.02 Scoping For EIS Projects. The scoping process identifies the types of actions to be completed, the range of alternatives and impacts and the significant impacts to be addressed in the Environmental Document. Scoping allows the agency to identify potential environmental concerns or controversy early in the project development. NEPA rules require scoping during preparation of the draft EIS (40 CFR 1501.7, 23 CFR 771.123). NEPA does not require scoping for a supplemental EIS, however, the co-lead agencies can decide to hold an open house early in the supplemental EIS process that serves the same purpose.

Scoping information may come from agency consultations, public comments, the analyst’s own experience and knowledge, underlying studies support of the project proposal, expert opinion or other NEPA analyses.

Scoping is a process that must involve the public and that is designed to discover the range of issues that may or are likely to impact the project. Obviously this process must occur at the earliest possible point in the project development process in order to complete a coherent plan for the project. As listed in 40 CFR 1501.7 (a),(b) (see Exhibit 300-2), the objectives of scoping are as follows:

Ø Invite Other Agencies to Participate

Ø Determine Scope and Other Substantial or Significant Issues

Ø Identify and Eliminate Insignificant Issues

Ø Identify the Relevant Environmental Document to be Prepared

Ø Identify Review and Consultation Elements

Ø Adopt Measures to Correlate Environmental Analysis and Scoping

Ø Allocate Assignments to Outside Agencies

Ø Set Document Length Limit and Time Constraints

350.02.01 Types of Actions to be Evaluated.

Some actions may be interrelated and will then have to be included in the Environmental analysis. The interrelationship can be classified as “similar” actions, “connected” actions and “cumulative” actions.

Ø Similar actions are those that, when viewed with other reasonably foreseeable proposed actions, have similarities that provide a basis for evaluating their environmental consequences together, but are not necessarily connected.

Ø Connected actions are closely related and described as: automatically triggering other actions; cannot proceed without other actions; or are interdependent parts of a larger action that justifies their existence.

Ø Cumulative actions cause or contribute to substantial or significant impacts when reviewed with other actions.

350.02.02 Types of Alternatives to be Evaluated.

All alternatives meeting the Purpose and Need and that can reasonably be constructed, regardless of cost, should be evaluated. Cost may be one of the factors for eliminating an alternative but it cannot be the only factor unless it is the only factor that differentiates two alternatives with the same or similar impacts and that meet the Purpose and Need.

The No Build Alternative must always be considered. In many evaluations the no build alternative is listed as having no cost. This is not generally true. Loss of time due to congestion, economic loss due to accidents or inability to get customers to markets and/or increased maintenance, etc., should be considered as part of the cost of “doing nothing”, if the proposed project would alleviate that cost.

350.02.03 Types of Impacts to be Evaluated.

Three types of impacts must be evaluated: direct impacts, indirect impacts and cumulative impacts. This covers all impacts but scoping should eliminate those impacts that are obviously inconsequential. Scoping should also determine impacts that may or may not be substantial or significant but that cannot be quantified without environmental analysis.

350.03 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). The DEIS is the initial project report. It identifies the alternative actions and presents an analysis of their relative impacts on the environment. It may identify a recommended course of action if one alternative is clearly preferred. The DEIS summarizes the early coordination and scoping process, identifies key issues, and presents pertinent information obtained through these efforts.

The District Office prepares the preliminary DEIS using discipline reports and/or other data supplied by Resource Agencies, IDT and other sources, and begins a commitment file (see Section 300.04(5) and administrative record.

The District office coordinates reviews by various interested parties and appropriate federal agencies. Review comments are returned to the District Office for revision of the preliminary DEIS. After reviewing changes made in response to comments on the preliminary DEIS, the District Office submits the DEIS to the ITD Headquarters Environmental Section Manager, who approves the DEIS by signing the title page, and then obtains concurrence for circulation from each appropriate federal official listed on the title page. The concurrence is acknowledged by the signature of that official on the title page. The signed title page and approval to print the DEIS are returned to the District Office and the document is printed and made available for public review as described below.

350.04 Notice of Availability/ Public Hearing Notice. The District Office submits the DEIS for placement of a Notice of Availability in the Federal Register (see 40 CFR 1506.10). A comment period of not less than 45 days begins upon publication of the notice in the Federal Register.

ITD is required to use the public notice procedures detailed in the Public Information Manual to inform the public that the DEIS is available and that a public hearing may be requested. If a hearing is required to fulfill any legal requirements, include information on the availability of the DEIS in the notice.

The hearing date is a minimum of 15 days after publication of the availability of the DEIS. The end of the comment period is 30 days following the date of the public hearing.

Public notice requirements include:

Ø Publishing the notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the county, city, or general geographic area where the proposal is located.

The publication of notice may also have to be in a local paper if the project is some distance from the area paper of general circulation.

Ø Notifying agencies with jurisdiction, affected tribes, and groups known to be interested in the proposal or who have commented in writing about the proposal.

Ø Contacting news media and placing notices in district, neighborhood, or ethnic periodicals.

Ø Giving public notice at least 30 days in advance of a public hearing. The environmental document continues to be available for 15 days after the hearing date.

The DEIS Notice of Availability contains the following:

Ø Location of project.

Ø Brief description.

Ø Information on wetlands, floodplains, Section 4(f) lands, or endangered species if applicable.

Ø Purpose of EIS.

Ø Responsible agency.

Ø Federal lead agency (NEPA).

Ø Where documents are available.

Ø Where to send comments.

Ø “Comments are requested by (date).”

Ø Date, time, and location of public hearing or invitation to request a public hearing.

Ø The ADA statement from 300.02(4)(a).

350.05 Public Hearing.

NEPA

If a need for a public hearing can be anticipated, early planning for a hearing can save time. Instead of waiting until the end of the comment period to start the procedure for the public hearing, begin as soon as the need is verified. Public hearings are required for all NEPA EIS projects and for other NEPA projects if falling under the following ITD policy:

Ø There are identified environmental issues (e.g. heavy traffic volumes on local streets, visual quality), which should be discussed in a public forum.

Ø ITD has a substantial interest in holding a hearing to further public comment and involvement.

Ø Substantial environmental controversy is associated with the proposed action.

Ø An agency (FHWA) with jurisdiction over the proposal (permitting agency) requests a hearing. As a minimum, a notice of opportunity for a hearing is published in newspapers.

Or if falling under 23 CFR 771.111(h)(2)(iii) for:

Ø Projects which require significant amounts of right-of-way

Ø Project with substantial changes to layout or functions of connecting roads or facilities being improved

Ø Projects with substantial adverse impact on abutting property

Ø Projects with significant social, economic, environmental or other effect

Ø Or any time the FHWA deems a public hearing is in the public interest.

Where hearings are not required by statute, informational meetings may serve as a useful forum for public involvement in the environmental process.

Public Hearing Sequence

Ø Approval of content of the document by FHWA

Ø Distribute the document to the resource agencies and interested stakeholders

Ø Publish notice of availability of the document and the public hearing

This must be done at least 15 days prior to the hearing

Hearing room must meet public access requirements. See tri message section 300.02(4)

Ø Hold hearing and gather comments. Public has 30 days to generate comments (45 days if 4(f) is involved.

Ø Revise document to incorporate comments and responses

Ø Obtain FHWA agreement on revised document

Ø Republish notice of document availability for public review for another 30 day period

Ø If no new issues, request ROD or FONSI.

350.06 Circulation of DEIS. Circulation of Draft and Final EISs is required under federal regulations (40 CFR 1502.19) Generally, all copies sent out during the circulation of the DEIS are free of charge. After initial circulation, a fee may be charged which is not more than the cost of printing. See Section 300.02(5). The District Office must distribute NEPA DEISs no later than the time the document is filed with the USEPA in accordance with 40 CFR 1506.9. Required distribution is as follows:

Ø Federal or other agencies with jurisdiction or environmental expertise on the project.

Ø Tribes (affected by project, both “usual and accustomed areas” and fishery resources).

Ø Cities and counties in which adverse environmental impacts identified in the EIS may occur, if the proposal were implemented.

Ø Local agencies of political subdivisions whose public services would be changed as a result of implementation of the proposal (e.g., public works, parks, planning, schools, water or sewer s).

Ø The applicable local, area wide, or District agency, if any, that has been designated under federal law to conduct intergovernmental review and coordinate federal activities with state or local planning (e.g., Clean Air Agency, ports, Indian Fisheries Commission, transit authorities).

Ø Media (legal and local newspapers).

Ø Public officials, private interest groups, and members of the public having or expressing an interest in the proposed project or DEIS.

The latter category normally includes:

Ø Each private interest group, but not each member.

Ø Public officials, private interest groups, or individuals who provided significant input during meetings and/or hearings.

Ø Individuals who have shown interest by attending several meetings, even though they did not provide specific input.

Ø Any individual who has shown interest by visiting an FHWA, ITD, or local agency office for information on the proposed project or by requesting a copy of the DEIS from the lead agency.

The DEIS is also distributed to:

Ø ITD Project Development Office

Ø Transportation Commission

Ø Attorney General

Ø State Library

When visual impacts are a significant issue, the DEIS should be circulated to officially designated local arts councils and other organizations interested in design, art, and architecture.

350.07 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).

350.07.01 Preliminary FEIS.

After the public comment period, public and agency comments are evaluated to determine whether:

Ø Additional studies are required to respond to those comments.

Ø Impacts of the preferred alternative fall within an envelope of impacts for alternatives described in the DEIS (especially if a modified or hybrid alternative is selected as preferred).

Ø A supplemental EIS is required to provide additional or missing information prior to issuing a Final EIS.

The FEIS contains FHWA and ITD final recommendations or preferred alternative, lists or summarizes by group the comments received on the DEIS, summarizes citizen involvement, and describes procedures required to ensure that mitigation measures are implemented. The FEIS also documents compliance with environmental laws and Executive Orders.

If a DEIS adequately identifies and quantifies the environmental impacts of all reasonable alternatives, evaluate the next step by reviewing the FHWA Technical Advisory T 6640.8A (Exhibit 300-4) which gives three options for preparing a Final EIS: traditional approach, condensed Final EIS, and abbreviated Final EIS.

ITD practice is to produce reader friendly documents with conclusions in one document. In the traditional approach, preferred by FHWA, the FEIS incorporates the DEIS (essentially in its entirety) with changes made as appropriate throughout the document. Changes may reflect the selection of an alternative, modifications to the project, updated information on the affected environment, changes in the assessment of impacts, selection of mitigation measures, and wetland and floodplain findings. These are the results of coordination, comments received on the DEIS, and responses to these comments. Since so much information is carried over from the draft to the final EIS, important changes are sometimes difficult for the reader to identify. These can be highlighted in an introductory section or attached summary.

350.07.02 Review and Publication of FEIS. The District Office reviews the preliminary FEIS and submits the document for review by the Attorney General’s office (on controversial projects) and the appropriate lead federal and state agencies.

After reviewing the preliminary FEIS and incorporating comments, the District Office prepares a draft Record of Decision (ROD) and submits it to the HQ Environmental Section Office (ESO) along with the FEIS. The ESO reviews the FEIS, and the ITD Headquarters Environmental Section Manager signs the title page. The federal agency approval to print is demonstrated by signature on the title page, possibly with a short list of minor changes to make prior to printing. The FEIS is then submitted for publication of the FEIS Notice of Availability in the Federal Register.

350.07.03 Distribution. After approval, the District Office distributes copies of the FEIS as follows (40 CFR 1502.19(d). Federal agencies (do not list co-lead agencies)

Ø Tribes (affected by project, both “usual and accustomed areas” and fishery resources)

Ø State agencies (do not list co-lead agencies)

Ø District agencies (e.g., Clean Air Authority, transit, Indian Fisheries Commissions)

Ø County (public works,)

Ø Local agencies (public works, parks, schools, water/sewer )

Ø Libraries

Ø Media (legal and local newspapers)

Ø Organizations and individuals who have expressed interest

Ø ESO, Attorney General, and State Library

When filed with USEPA, the final EIS shall be available for public review at the offices of ITD and FHWA. The final EIS may also be sent to the Federal Register for availability to the general public. A copy should also be made available for public review at institutions such as local government offices, libraries and schools, as appropriate.

350.07.04 Notice of Availability. ITD notifies the public in a similar manner as for the DEIS, except there is no official comment period. Comments received during the 30 days following the issue of the FEIS will be noted and responded to in the Record of Decision and made available to the public upon request. If the agency receives petitions from a specific group or organization, a notice or EIS may be sent to the group and not to each petitioner.

350.08 Record of Decision (NEPA).

350.08.01 Record of Decision (ROD). The draft Record of Decision (ROD), prepared by the District Office, accompanies the FEIS through the review and approval process. The ROD explains the reasons for the project decision, summarizes any mitigation measures that will be incorporated in the project, and documents any required Section 4(f) approval (40 CFR 1505.2). Guidance on preparing and distributing the ROD is in FHWA’s Technical Advisory T6640.8A. (Exhibit 300-4)

The ROD is intended by the CEQ to be an environmental document (CEQ 40 Questions, #34a). Therefore, it must be made available to the public through appropriate public notice as required by 40 CFR 1506.6(b). However, there is no specific requirement for publication of the ROD itself, either in the Federal Register or elsewhere. It is ITD practice to publish a Notice of Availability in the newspapers previously used for project notices.

Under NEPA, FHWA or other federal lead agency issues the final ROD. The District Office obtains the approved ROD from the federal agency and circulates it to the District Project Manager or whatever internal entity requires the clearance so that the project may advance to final design or PS&E.

The following format is used in preparing a ROD:

Ø Decision – Identify the selected alternative. Refer to the FEIS to avoid repetition.

Ø Alternatives considered – Briefly describe each alternative (with reference to the FEIS, as above), explain and discuss the balancing of values underlying the decision. Values for economic, environmental, safety, traffic service, community planning, and other decision factors may vary in relative importance. Identify each significant value and the reasons why some values were considered more important than others. The ROD should reflect the manner in which these values were considered in arriving at the decision. Identify the environmentally preferred alternative or alternatives. In addition, if Section 4(f) property is used, summarize the Section 4(f) evaluation.

Ø Measures to minimize harm – Describe all measures to minimize environmental harm that have been adopted for the proposed action. State whether all practicable measures to minimize environmental harm have been incorporated into the decision, and if not, why.

Ø Monitoring or enforcement program – Describe any monitoring or enforcement program that has been adopted for the specific mitigation measures, as outlined in the FEIS.

Ø Mitigation Plan – Include an item-by-item list of commitments and mitigation measures from the commitment file. The list serves as a ready reference for the design, construction, and maintenance of the project

350.09 Proceed with Design. After all environmental documents in the environmental and design stages have been approved and finalized, the project may advance to right of way acquisition and preparation of the PS&E.

Section 360.00 - Preparation of an EIS

The primary purpose of an environmental impact statement is to ensure that the intent of NEPA becomes an integral part of programs and actions of state and local governments. Agency officials use the EIS in conjunction with other relevant materials and considerations to plan actions and make decisions. The EIS is to provide an impartial discussion of significant environmental impacts and inform decision makers and the public of reasonable alternatives, including mitigation measures, which would avoid or minimize adverse impacts or enhance environmental quality. The EIS process enables government agencies and interested citizens to review and comment on proposed government actions. The process is intended to assist the agencies and applicants to improve their plans and decisions, and to encourage the resolution of potential concerns or problems prior to issuing a final statement. See Exhibit 300-4 (FHWA Technical Guidance 6640.8A) for sample NEPA EIS outlines and cover sheets.

360.01 Purpose and Need Statement. The purpose and need section is in many ways the most important section of an environmental impact statement. It explains to the public and decision makers that the expenditure of funds is necessary and worthwhile and that the priority the project is being given relative to other needed highway projects is warranted. In addition, although significant environmental impacts may result from the project, the purpose and need section should justify why impacts are acceptable based on the project’s importance. It demonstrates problems that exist or will exist if a project is not implemented, and drives the process for alternative consideration, analysis, and selection of the preferred alternative. It should clearly demonstrate that a “need” exists and should define the “need” in terms understandable to the general public. Although the Purpose and Need must state explicitly why the project is needed, it must not be stated so narrowly that only one action can fulfill the need. That would predetermine the alternative and this determination cannot be made without the study and comparison of the various alternatives for a given project and agreement by the stakeholders in the project.

The “purpose” portion of the statement should not describe construction activities. This is a statement of broader scope. For instance, adding a lane to an existing alignment does not have the “purpose” of laying a twelve-foot strip of pavement to an existing alignment. Instead, the purpose is to increase capacity, or aid traffic flow from point A to point B.

The “need” portion of the statement is also not a construction summary. Here the need for the example above may be to improve safety or improve due to accident increases or to increase the level of service. It describes why the purpose has arisen. The construction details of the project are listed in the alternatives being considered to meet the need defined by the purpose. Various elements of purpose and need can be explored for any given project, including such concerns as mobility, safety, or economic development.

360.02 Alternatives to the Proposal. An environmental document includes a comparison of impacts for different alternatives. The document must evaluate all reasonable alternatives to the action and discuss why other alternatives that may have been considered were eliminated from detailed study. NEPA rules require that reasonable alternatives include actions that could feasibly attain or approximate the objectives of a proposal, but at a lower environmental cost or decreased level of environmental degradation.

360.02.01 Typical Alternatives.

Alternatives normally include the following:

Ø The no-action alternative, including routine maintenance and repair (such as safety improvements) that are part of routine operation of an existing roadway, and continued operation of the existing roadway system. This alternative does not include improvements that would increase capacity through widening an existing structure or roadway segment, or change the footprint of the structure or roadway prism. The consequences of the no-action alternative must be considered. The no-action alternative establishes a baseline condition for comparison with the other alternatives, which can be considered in order to fulfill the purpose of the project.

Ø Alternatives to improve the existing facility, including resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation, high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, park and ride facilities, and other minor improvements.

Ø Multi-modal alternatives, including public transit, rail, water, and air transportation, or other modes of transportation dictated by the characteristics of the study area. These may be under the jurisdiction of other lead agencies and require early coordination.

Ø Alternative routes and/or locations.

Ø A combination of the above alternatives.

360.02.02 NEPA Criteria. Identifying and studying alternatives to a proposal is the key to the NEPA process objective of finding transportation solutions that help preserve and protect the value of environmental and community resources. Evaluation of alternatives should present the proposed action and all the alternatives in comparative form, to define the issues and provide a clear basis for choice among the options. CEQ implementing regulations (40 CFR 1502.14) call the alternatives analysis section the "heart of the EIS," and require that agencies shall:

Ø Rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable alternatives, and for alternatives that were eliminated from detailed study, briefly discuss the reasons for eliminating them.

Ø Devote substantial treatment to each alternative considered in detail, including the proposed action, so reviewers may evaluate their comparative merits.

Ø Include reasonable alternatives not within the jurisdiction of the lead agency.

Ø Include the alternative of no action.

Ø Identify the agency’s preferred alternative or alternatives, in the draft EIS and identify such alternative in the final EIS unless another law prohibits the expression of such a preference.

Ø Include appropriate mitigation measures not already included in the proposed action or alternatives.

For FHWA guidance on alternatives, see: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/alts.htm

360.03 Organization of the EIS. ITD EISs follow the NEPA format. Because EIS formats are not mandatory, agencies sometimes prepare EISs with the more reader-friendly format, presenting information regarding a particular topic in the same

section.

Additional guidance concerning the organization and format of the EIS documents can be obtained from the following source: _ http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/regs/ceq/toc_ceq.htm Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR Section 1502.10) – Recommended Format.

360.04 Elements of the Environment. Exhibit 300-4 presents the elements of the environment to be considered under NEPA and other state and federal legislation. Guidance on analyzing each type of impact can be found in various sections of the Environmental Process Manual. In addition to NEPA requirements, Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act applies to projects affecting publicly owned parks, recreation areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites. Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Funds Act applies to conversion of outdoor recreation property acquired or developed with grant assistance from an Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation. For guidance on preparing Section 4(f) and Section 6(f) evaluations, see Section 1700 & Section 1800.

360.05 Affected Environment. CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1502.15; http://www.anchorage.ak.blm.gov/deparefs/1502.htm) require EISs (the same is true for EAs) to succinctly describe the environment of the area(s) to be affected by the alternatives under consideration. Descriptions should be no longer than is necessary for the reader to understand the relative impacts of the alternatives. Data and analysis should be commensurate with the magnitude of the impact, with less important material summarized, consolidated, or simply referenced.

360.06 Analysis of Impacts. Under CEQ regulations (CFR 1502.16) the EIS discussion of impacts forms the scientific and analytical basis for comparisons of alternatives. The EIS must discuss impacts on the natural environment (air, water, land). As appropriate, the EIS must also discuss impacts on urban quality, historical and cultural resources, and the design of the built environment, including reuse and conservation potential of various alternatives and mitigation measures.

7-11-444) T6640.8A) Permits

Impacts must be discussed for each alternative, and summarized in comparing the relative impacts of the alternatives including the proposal (CEQ 1502.14). For each alternative, the energy, natural and depletable resource requirements and conservation potential must be discussed.

The EIS should discuss in general terms the relationship of local short-term impacts, use of resources, maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and the irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources for the proposed action..

In addition, the EIS must describe possible conflicts between the proposed action and the objectives of federal, district, state, local and tribal land use plans, policies, and controls for the area affected by the project. NEPA requires analysis of direct, indirect, secondary, and cumulative impacts. For example, a direct impact would be that a new highway will result in filling a wetland; an indirect impact would be that the highway will encourage increased development because of improved access; a cumulative impact would be that increased runoff and contaminants from the highway would be added to the volume and level of contamination from other development around the wetland. For guidance on analysis of cumulative impacts, see Section 2200. Impacts may be temporary, such as the short-term impacts associated with the construction phase of a project, or permanent, such as the long-term impact of increasing runoff and contamination from a widened highway. A summary of significant adverse impacts remaining after mitigation should follow the discussion of all impacts.

360.06.01 Direct Impacts. Direct impacts are easiest to conceptualize and identify. They are defined as effects that are caused by the proposed action or alternative and that occur at the same time and place. Impacts, or effects, may be ecological, aesthetic, historic, cultural, economic, social, or health-related.

360.06.02 Indirect Impacts. Indirect impacts are caused by the action, but occur later in time or are at a further distance from the direct impacts of the project. Indirect impacts must be quantified if possible. When no reasonable assessment of indirect impacts can be made, the discipline report needs to identify the agency or agencies with jurisdiction and the specific regulations that would govern additional impacts caused by others. For example, construction of a new interchange does not cause additional development; however, it could facilitate such development.

In most cases, predicting the type, location, or timing of future development with any accuracy is impossible. It is therefore impractical to attempt to predict associated impacts. In such cases, address indirect impacts by identifying the regulatory authority(ies) (city, county, District, state, and/or federal) and the specific regulation(s), for example., Section 14.8 of Queen County’s Comprehensive Plan.

Example: “Construction of Alternative A2 would result in eliminating approximately 2.3 acres of wetlands. Future development along the highway corridor could affect additional wetland areas. Any such development affecting wetlands would have to comply with Executive Order 11990, and Section 14.8 of Queen County’s Comprehensive Land use Plan.”

360.06.03 Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts result from the incremental effect of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over time. See Section 2200 for detailed guidance on analyzing cumulative impacts.

360.07 Mitigation. The EIS also must discuss the proposed means to mitigate the identified environmental impacts. Proposed mitigation should be in addition to standard mitigation incorporated into all contracts. Under CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.20), mitigation may include:

Ø Avoiding the impact altogether

Ø Minimizing impacts by limiting the scale of the action

Ø Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment

Ø Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations

Ø Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments

For FHWA guidance on mitigation, see:

Section 370.00 - Section 4(f) and Section 106 Documents and Procedures

370.01 Section 4(f) Evaluation. When a project involves federal funding or permits and requires the use of any publicly owned land from a park, recreation area, wildlife or waterfowl refuge, or a cultural resource site on or eligible for the National Register of Historical Places, a Section 4(f) evaluation must be included in a separate section of the EA or EIS. A separate evaluation is prepared for each location within the project where the use of Section 4(f) property is being considered.

On all Federal aid projects FHWA will make determination of effect based on the information submitted by ITD. When the SHPO renders an opinion of the eligibility of a historical or cultural site and determines the effect on that resource (even if a “no effect” opinion is made) a 4(f) determination must be made by FHWA.

For details, see Section 1800 which includes a 4(f) evaluation checklist. The non programmatic DEIS/Section 4(f) evaluation report must be circulated to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior for a 45-day review and comment period. Programmatic determinations are made at the FHWA division office. When appropriate, the U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban development and the Secretary of Agriculture are also given an opportunity to review the proposal. When a Section 4(f) property is identified after the DEIS and/or FEIS has been processed, a separate Section 4(f) evaluation is prepared, circulated for comment, and finalized.

370.01.01 Contents (Draft & Final).

The Section 4(f) document should include the sections listed below.

Ø Introduction – Include the following statement: “Federal regulations prohibit the FHWA from using land from a significant publicly owned park, recreation area, wildlife or waterfowl refuge, or from a significantly historical site. An exception occurs if the United States Secretary of Transportation makes a determination that (1) there is no feasible* and prudent** alternative to the use of such land; and (2) the proposed action includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the property.”

*Feasible is defined as being possible to construct using sound engineering practices. It disregards limitations and cost. Prudent is defined as not involving extraordinary cost or community disruption.

**Prudent is defined as having no extraordinary cost, social, economic and environmental impacts or community disruption resulting from alternatives to avoid the 4(f) property.

Ø Description of Action.

Ø Description of 4(f) Resource – with figure(s) showing the entire resource.

Ø Impacts on the Resource – resulting from construction and/or operation.

Ø Avoidance Alternatives – can refer to and incorporate discussion from EIS.

Ø Measures to Mitigate Harm – Detailed discussions of mitigation measures in the EIS or EA may be referenced and appropriately summarized, rather than repeated.

Ø Record of Coordination – Include information on all agencies contacted. As applicable, include: Department of Interior, District Office of HUD, USDA, Forest Supervisor of the affected National Forest, SHPO, local agency with jurisdiction. Include the National Park Service position on the land transfer if Section 6(f) land is impacted.

Ø Conclusion (FEIS only) – The conclusion that there are no feasible and prudent alternatives is not addressed at the draft Section 4(f) evaluation stage. Such conclusion is made only after the draft Section 4(f) evaluation has been circulated and coordinated and any identified issues adequately evaluated. With the FEIS include this concluding statement: “Based upon the above considerations, there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of land from the [identify Section 4(f) property] and the proposed action includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the [Section 4(f) property] resulting from such use.” (Source: FHWA Technical Advisory T 6640.8A; Exhibit 300-4)

370.01.02 4(f) Inventory Questions. Avoiding impacts to possible 4(f) resources is a prime concern as alternatives are defined and design decisions are made. To document an inventory of existing recreational resources within the study area, request the owner agency for information on the areas of interest below.

Ø To provide a detailed map or drawing of sufficient scale to identify the resources on the property.

Ø What is the size (in acres or square feet) and location (maps, sketches) of the resources?

Ø What is the type or nature of the property (e.g., recreation, boat launch, historic, passive recreation)?

Ø What is the function of or what are available activities on the property (e.g., swimming, golfing, baseball, picnic table)?

Ø Describe and locate all existing and planned facilities on your map/sketch (tennis courts, baseball diamonds, picnic table, restroom, etc.). Are the parcels part of any existing or proposed State Recreation Master Plan?

Ø What is the access (pedestrian and vehicles), and usage (e.g., approximate number of users/visitors) in a time period of the owner’s choice?

Ø Is there a relationship to other similarly used public lands in the vicinity?

Ø Are any applicable clauses affecting ownership, such as lease, easement, covenants, restrictions or conditions, including forfeiture?

Ø Are any unusual characteristics (flooding problems, terrain conditions, or other features) that either reduce or enhance the value of all or part of the property?

Ø Has the acquisition of land or any improvements to the resource used funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, administered by the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC)?

370.01.03 Nationwide 4(f) Programmatic Evaluations. The following categories of impact on 4(f) resources can use a programmatic 4(f) evaluation if certain requirements are met:

Ø Minor involvement with public parks, recreation lands, and wildlife and waterfowl refuges.

Ø Minor involvement with historic sites.

Ø Use of historic bridges.

Ø Independent bikeway or walkway construction projects.

For details, see Section 1800.

370.01.04 Final Section 4(f) Evaluation. When the selected alternative involves the use of Section 4(f) property, a Section 4(f) evaluation is included as a separate section in the FEIS/EA.

370.01.05 Circulation of Section 4(f) Evaluations. Normally, Section 4(f) evaluations are included in an EA or EIS and are circulated with the environmental document. If an EA is involved, the draft 4(f) evaluation is combined and issued with the EA. After the environmental hearing and comment period, the final 4(f) evaluation is combined and issued with the FONSI as a public document. If a Section 4(f) evaluation is processed separately, it should be distributed to officials having jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) property, and to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the U.S. Department of Agriculture when these agencies have an interest in or jurisdiction over the affected Section 4(f) resource (23 CFR 771.135(i)).

370.02 Section 106 – Historic and Cultural Resources. Section 106 of the Historic Properties Act applies to transportation projects affecting a historic property listed on or eligible for listing on the National Historic Register. Special provisions apply to the use of historic bridges for highway projects. Under the Archeological Resources Protection Act, projects that involve the acquisition of right of way or excavation within existing right of way may need to be surveyed and inventoried to determine if cultural resources exist. (See Section 1800 for details.)

Section 106 property may also meet the requirements for a Section 4(f) evaluation even if it has been determined that the proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the site. The proper term for no effect on 106 properties is “No Historic Properties Affected”.

The protection of a Section 106 National Historic Register historic resource is documented by preparing a Determination of Eligibility and Determination of Significance and Effect (ITD 1500A). Both documents are processed through the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) for concurrence. Section 106 requires consultation with interested tribes, resource agencies and stakeholders at the beginning of the project and throughout the project.

Section 380.00 - Re-Evaluations and Supplemental Documents

Once a ROD, FONSI, or CE designation has been approved for a project, the designation must be reviewed at various stages of project development to determine if the approved designation remains valid. Prior to any major action, such as approval of the Design Summary, PS&E, or right of way purchase, the environmental document or CE designation is reexamined to establish that it is still valid and to ensure that any mitigating measures or commitments are contained in the appropriate documents.

If a project meets the conditions listed below, a formal written reevaluation of the existing document or CE designation is required. For regulatory guidance, see 23 CFR 771.129 – 130 and FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8A.(See Exhibit 300-4)

380.01 Re-Evaluations. For NEPA implementing regulations on project reevaluations, see 23 CFR 771.129.

380.01.01 When Re-Evaluation Is Required. The District may reevaluate a CE, EA or EIS any time single or cumulative conditions have changed which might result in new or more severe environmental impacts. Reevaluation is required when any one of the following conditions exists:

Ø An acceptable FEIS has not been submitted to FHWA within three years from the date of DEIS circulation (23CFR771.129(b)).

Ø Major steps to advance the project (such as approval to acquire a substantial portion of the right of way or approval of PS&E) have not occurred within one year from a NEPA Decision.

Ø Any substantive change is made to the proposed action. The district reevaluates the project by conducting appropriate environmental studies, or, if necessary for an EIS, by preparing an EA to assess the impacts of the changes.

Ø When any change in laws or regulations occur (such as listing a new species under ESA).

Ø When the wetland delineation may be older than three years.

Ø If the USFWS species list is more than 180 days old and contains a new listing, a new BA will need to be generated and concurrence incorporated into the approved document or CE.

380.01.02 Documentation. When any of the above conditions apply, the District Office prepares a written reevaluation to determine if a supplement to the DEIS or a new DEIS is required. The written reevaluation should address all current environmental requirements. The focus should be on changes to the project, its surroundings, environmental impacts, and/or any new issues identified since either the CE, FONSI, DEIS, or FEIS was issued. The results of any field reviews, additional studies, and/or coordination with other agencies should be included in the reevaluation.

ITD’s 654 form provides an efficient method of documenting reevaluations. Any additional information required to explain changes in environmental impacts or to support a conclusion should be attached to this form. An optional method is to combine the form and any supplemental information into a single document.

380.01.03 Federal Review and Approval. The District Office forwards the re-evaluation to HQ for review and HQ will forward it for approval to FHWA. If, after reviewing the written re-evaluation, the FHWA or other federal lead agency concludes that a supplement to the DEIS or a new DEIS is not required, the decision should be appropriately documented and included in the project file. If the next major step in the process is preparation of a FEIS, the FEIS may be used to document the decision. The conclusions reached and any supporting information should be briefly summarized in the summary section of the FEIS. Public involvement is not part of the reevaluation process.

380.01.04 Limits of Project Reevaluation. For projects scheduled for completion in one phase, the reevaluation will include a review of the entire project. All aspects of the original Environmental Evaluation will be open to review as well as any modifications or additions to the original approved project plan.

Multi phase projects will be reevaluated according to the phases completed. For instance, a three phase project, with one phase completed, will be reevaluated only on the two unfinished phases, unless it is found that some portion of the completed phase is causing a negative impact on the uncompleted phases.

380.02 Supplemental Environmental Documents. Supplemental environmental documentation is required if the reevaluation identifies significant new or increased adverse environmental impacts or if changes have occurred to the projects that are not addressed in the original document. For NEPA projects, supplemental documentation may be a supplemental DEIS, a new DEIS, the addition of new or additional information in a FEIS, or an EA (23 CFR 771.130 and 40 CFR 1502.9). Supplemental environmental impact statements shall be reviewed and distributed in the same manner as DEISs and FEISs. Scoping is not required for NEPA documents.

Section 390.00 - Exhibits

Exhibit 300-1. Environmental Assessment Outline

PREFACE

This outline is provided for the guidance of authors and reviewers of Environmental Assessments (EAs). It is intended to ensure that EAs are complete and in compliance with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations 40 CFR 1500 to 1508, and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) regulations and guidelines set forth at 23 CFR 771, and in Technical Advisory T 6640.8A (See Exhibit 300-4)

There is no code requirement for an EA format, but for the sake of efficiency and consistency ITD HQ Environmental Section is requiring that all districts comply with the format included here.

An environmental assessment must be prepared for all actions involving Federal funds and/or approvals which do not qualify as a categorical exclusion and do not clearly require an environmental impact statement (EIS). The purpose of an EA is twofold. First, an EA should resolve any uncertainty as to whether an EIS is needed. Should the need for an EIS become evident at any time during the EA process, the EIS should be started. The second purpose of an EA is to provide sufficient information to serve as the record for all environmental approvals and consultations required by law.

If an EIS is not required, the EA is made available to resource agencies and the public for a 30-day review and comment period. Following public availability period, the EA is revised or a supplemental EA is prepared, as appropriate, to (1) describe changes to the proposed action or mitigation resulting from comments received on the EA or at the public hearing, if one is held; (2) include any necessary findings, agreements, or determinations (e.g., wetlands, Section 106, etc.); and (3) include a copy of pertinent comments received on the EA and the agency’s responses to the comments. This supplemental EA is then submitted to FHWA along with a copy of the public hearing transcript (if one is held), and a request for a finding of no significant impact (FONSI). If FHWA concurs with the finding, the EA process is completed with a determination that the action will have no significant impact to the environment (the FONSI), issued by FHWA.

This EA outline is designed to be a guide. It should not be viewed as an inflexible format for every EA. Although the regulations do not set page limits, the Council on Environmental Quality recommends that the length of EAs usually be less than 15 pages. To minimize volume, an EA should use good quality maps and exhibits. Background data and technical reports should be incorporated by references and summarized to support concise discussions of the alternatives and their impacts.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OUTLINE CONTENTS

Cover Sheet ……………………………(See Example at end of Exhibit)

Tri-Message Page…………………………………………………………

Table of Contents……………………………………………….….(Page)

Description of Proposed Action……………………………….…..(Page)

Purpose and Need for the Action…………………………….……(Page)

Alternatives to the Proposed Action………………………….…...(Page)

Impacts of the Proposed Action…………………………………...(Page)

Comments and Coordination……………………………….…..…(Page)

Section 4(f) Evaluation……………………………………….….…(Page)

Mitigation Plan Report…………………………………….………(Page)

Appendices……………………………………………………...…..(Page)

COVER SHEET

There is no required format for an EA cover sheet. Refer to T6640.8A (Exhibit 300-4) for a recommended format.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. Include all sections as well as a list, if possible, of any documents that are appended, adopted, or serve as technical reports for the EA.

B. Include a list of all maps, illustrations, and figures.

TRI MESSAGE PAGE

This page is added to cover any perceptions of discrimination or bias in disseminating the information to the public. The statements must be followed in any public involvement activities. The English/metric message is simply to explain why some of the information in the document, primarily that generated by ITD will be in English and why some information, primarily the scientific information, may be in metric.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

Describe the proposed action. If more than one alternative is being considered, describe each alternative. Include maps, illustrations, exhibits, etc. Be careful to include sufficient design data to allow an accurate assessment of impacts without committing to specific details that are subject to refinement or change. Lane and shoulder widths, median widths, etc., may be omitted or expressed as a variable if not definitely known. For example, “The proposed project will provide two travel lanes in each direction with a continuous, center and two-way left turn lanes. Including shoulders, the total roadway width will be 76 feet”; or “The proposed project will widen the existing roadway to two 12-foot lanes with 8 to 10 foot paved shoulders.” Do not assume that proposed design deviations will be approved at a future date.

A. Location, length, termini, and why the termini are logical

B. Major design features (brief description, not a complete design report)

1. Number of lanes, tracks, or runways

2. Median type/ function

3. Pavement or construction type

4. Typical cross-section(s)

5. Provisions for mass transit

6. Provisions for high occupancy vehicles.

7. Interchange and/or structural locations

a. Interchanges

b. Grade separations

c. At-grade intersections

d. Railroad crossings

e. River crossings

f. Pedestrian, bicycle, or equestrian crossings

8. Right of way acquisition requirements (Identify whether additional right of way will or will not be required. Specific right of way acquisition impacts are discussed under impacts elsewhere in the EA.)

9. Illumination.

10. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities

11. Displacement of utilities

12. Estimated cost and construction schedule

13. Permits needed, including name of permitting agency

PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION

The purpose and need section is in many ways the most important statement in an environmental document or environmental impact statement (EIS). It establishes why the agency is proposing to spend large amounts of taxpayers' money while at the same time causing substantial environmental impacts. A clear, well-justified purpose and need section explains to the public and decision makers that the expenditure of funds is necessary and worthwhile and that the priority the project is being given relative to other needed highway projects is warranted. In addition, although substantial environmental impacts are expected to be caused by the project, the purpose and need section should justify why impacts are acceptable based on the project's importance.

As importantly, the project purpose and need drives the process for alternatives consideration, in-depth analysis, and ultimate selection. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulation requires that the environmental document address the "no-action" alternative and "rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable alternatives." Furthermore, a well-justified purpose and need is vital to meeting the requirements of Section 4(f) (49 U.S.C. 303) and the Executive Orders on Wetlands (E.O. 11990) and Floodplains (E.O. 11988) and the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. Without a well-defined, well-established and well-justified purpose and need, it will be difficult to determine which alternatives are reasonable, prudent and practicable, and it may be impossible to dismiss the no-build alternative.

The transportation planning process, which includes regional, sub-area, and corridor planning, can serve as the primary source of information for establishing purpose and need as well as evaluating alternatives. Information and forecasts of vehicle miles of travel, travel demand, highway and travel speeds, traffic diversion, time of day characteristics, and traffic accident rates can be provided by the planning process. This information can be used to evaluate congestion, air quality, safety, and other environmental issues for various transportation alternatives including the no-build alternative. Planning can also estimate the benefits and costs associated with highway and transit projects that can be used in the development of project "purpose and need."

Elements of Purpose and Need This material is covered in Technical Advisory document TA 6640.8A (Exhibit 300-4)

The following items may assist in the explanation of the need for a proposed action. It is by no means all-inclusive or applicable in every situation and is intended only as a guide.

Ø Project Status - Briefly describe the project history including actions taken to date, other agencies and governmental units involved, action spending, schedules, etc.

Ø Capacity - Is the capacity of the present facility inadequate for the present traffic? Projected traffic? What capacity is needed? What is the level(s) of service for existing and proposed facilities?

Ø System Linkage - Is the proposed project a "connecting link?" How does it fit in the transportation system?

Ø Transportation Demand - Including relationship to any statewide plan or adopted urban transportation plan together with an explanation of the project's traffic forecasts that are substantially different from those estimates from the 23 U.S.C. 134 (Section 134) planning process.

Ø Legislation - Is there a Federal, State, or local governmental mandate for the action?

Ø Social Demands or Economic Development - New employment, schools, land use plans, recreation, etc. What projected economic development/land use changes indicate the need to improve or add to the highway capacity?

Ø Modal Interrelationships - How will the proposed facility interface with and serve to complement airports, rail and port facilities, mass transit services, etc.?

Ø Safety - Is the proposed project necessary to correct an existing or potential safety hazard? Is the existing accident rate excessively high? Why? How will the proposed project improve it?

Ø Roadway Deficiencies - Is the proposed project necessary to correct existing roadway deficiencies (e.g., substandard geometrics, load limits on structures, inadequate cross-section, or high maintenance costs)? How will the proposed project improve it?

The following is a list of items that may assist in clearly demonstrating the need for the action and should be viewed as additional detail for the items listed on the ITD 654 Form. The project need will come from the items listed in the Project Purpose and Benefits on the 654 form. All of the items are not applicable in every situation.

A. Transportation Demand and Capacity Needs. Is the present facility inadequate for existing traffic? Will the proposed action alleviate traffic congestion? Include relationship to any District, state, or local plans or urban transportation plan.

B. Safety Needs. Are existing accident rates excessively high? How will the proposed action decrease the accident rate? (Include quantitative accident figures before and predicted rate after construction.) Is the proposed action necessary to correct an undesirable situation?

C. System continuity. Is the proposed action necessary to complete a gap in the existing transportation system?

D. Structural Needs. Is the action needed to improve the structural condition of the existing facility?

E. Social Service Demands or Economic Development Needs. What projected economic development/land use changes indicate the need to improve or add to the highway capacity? Consider new employment, schools, land use plans, recreation, etc.

F. Environmental Impact Mitigation Needs. Is the proposed action designed to mitigate impacts caused by a related project?

G. Modal Interrelationship Needs. How will the proposed action interface with air, rail, and/or port facilities, mass transit services, etc.?

H. Legislative Mandate. Is there a Federal, state, or local governmental mandate for action?

ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION

In urbanized areas, the urban transportation planning process required by Section 134 of Title 23, should result in plans and programs that are consistent with the comprehensively planned development of an area and that integrate transportation, land use, and environmental considerations. Comprehensive planning, which includes transportation, should establish the basic purpose and need for specific projects and the system wide consequences of operational improvements and the no-build alternative. For example, the planning process should identify the need for a transportation improvement between points x and y at some future date. Further, in a high percentage of cases, a decision on the appropriate mode (highway or transit) and the basic project concept (freeway on new location, upgrade of existing facility, light rail transit, bus/high-occupancy vehicle lanes, approximate travel demand, etc.) can be determined. In other cases, it may not be possible to resolve these issues until the conclusion of the project development process. Scoping meetings early in the environmental process are an excellent means to reach agreement with the participants on the basic purpose and need for the project, the consequences of the no-build alternative, and operational improvements and, where possible, the mode and project concept.

After the basic purpose and need for the project are established, a number of lines can theoretically still be drawn to connect points x and y. If the project's purpose and need are so vague as to only stipulate that a transportation improvement between x and y is needed, then reasonable alternatives would cover a wide range and must be evaluated to comply with the CEQ regulations. As the project's purpose and need is refined, a number of alternatives will drop out, thereby permitting a more focused analysis of those alternatives that truly address the problem to be solved. As alternatives are dropped from consideration, it is recommended that the concurrence of those cooperating agencies with jurisdiction by law be sought in that decision.

In a similar manner, the type of improvement to be considered even after the planning process may be wide ranging: from upgrading an existing facility to multi-lane freeway on new location. The traffic demands, safety concerns, system continuity considerations, etc., all will help define reasonable alternatives and products from the transportation planning process should serve as a primary source for this information.

Beyond the CEQ regulations requirement of evaluating all, or a reasonable number representative of the full spectrum of reasonable alternatives, there are other more action-limiting requirements for alternatives under Section 4(f), the Executive Orders on Wetlands and Floodplains, and the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines. To address these requirements and conclusively demonstrate that some alternatives are not prudent or practicable, a well-justified purpose and need are vital.

The use of land from a Section 4(f) protected property (significant publicly owned public park, recreation area or wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or any significant historic site) may not be approved unless a determination is made that there is no feasible and prudent alternative to such use. There are numerous factors that could render an alternative "not prudent" because of unique problems, including cost and environmental impacts. If an alternative does not meet the project's purpose or satisfy the needs then the alternative is not prudent provided the purpose and need section can substantiate that unique problems will be caused by not building the project.

If a proposed action is to be located in a wetland or it entails a floodplain encroachment with significant impacts, a finding must be made that there is no practicable alternative to the wetland take or floodplain encroachment. Any alternative that does not meet the need for the project is not practicable. If the project's purpose and need are not adequately addressed, specifically delineated and properly justified, resource agencies, interest groups, the public or others will be able to generate one or possibly several alternatives which avoid or limit the impact and "appear" practicable. Sometimes long, drawn out negotiations or additional analyses are needed to clearly demonstrate that an alternative is not practicable, where a well-described justification of the project's purpose and need would have clearly established it.

If an alternative does not satisfy the purpose and need for the project, as a rule, it should not be included in the analysis as an apparent reasonable alternative. There are times when an alternative that is not reasonable is included based on the request of another agency or due to public expectation. In such cases, it should be clearly explained why the alternative is not reasonable (or prudent or practicable), why it is being analyzed in detail and that because it is not reasonable that it will not be selected.

IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

The primary purpose of an EA is to help the agency and the FHWA decide whether or not an EIS is needed. Therefore, the EA should address only those resources or features that the agency and the FHWA decide will have likelihood for being significantly affected. Impact areas that do not have a reasonable possibility for individual or cumulative significant environmental impacts need not be discussed. However, if it would be unclear to a layman why an impact area is unaffected, the EA should briefly explain why there is no effect. The EA should list those elements of the environment that will not be significantly affected.

Discuss any social, economic, and environmental impacts that would be caused by the proposed action, or by each alternative if more than one proposal is under consideration, whose significance is uncertain. The level of analysis should be sufficient to adequately identify the impacts and appropriate mitigation measures, and to address known to foreseeable public and agency concerns. Discuss why these impacts are not considered significant. For each element analyzed, include the following information:

A. Studies performed and coordination conducted

B. Affected environment. The description of the affected environment shall be no longer that is necessary to understand the effects of the proposed action

C. Impacts of the proposed action during construction

D. Impacts of the proposed action during operation

E. Mitigation measures, commitments, and monitoring procedures

F. Why the impacts are not considered significant

The items listed on the ITD 654 form (below)should be identified or addressed in the document as not affected, or as not being substantially affected, by the project. When an analysis of an individual element is required to assess the significance of an impact, refer to the NEPA EIS Outline [See Exhibit 300-4 and Section 300.06(6)] for additional information.

1. Noise Criteria Impacts*

2. Change in Access or Access Control

3. Change in Travel Patterns

4. Neighborhood or Service Impacts

5. Economic Disruption

6. Inconsistent w/Local or State Planning

7. Minorities, Low Income Populations

8. Displacements*

10. LWCF Recreation Areas/6(f) Lands*

11. Section 106-Nat. Hist. Preser. Act*

12 FAA Airspace Intrusion

13. Visual Impacts

14. Prime Farmland,* Parcel Splits

15. Known/Suspected "Hazmat" Risks

16. Wildlife/Fish Resources, Habitat**

17. Threatened/Endangered Species*

18. Air Quality Impacts

19. Inconsistent w/Air Quality Plan

20. Stream Alteration/Encroachment**

21. Flood Plain Encroachment*

22. Regulatory Floodway

23. Navigable Waters**

24. Wetlands*

25. Sole Source Aquifer

26. Water Quality, Runoff Impacts

27. NPDES-General Permit

COMMENTS AND COORDINATION

Describe all early and continuing coordination efforts, and summarize the key issues and pertinent information received from government agencies and the public. Include a list of agencies and, as appropriate, members of the public consulted.

SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION (if any)

If the EA includes a Section 4(f) evaluation, the EA/draft Section 4(f) evaluation must be circulated to the appropriate agencies for Section 4(f) coordination (23 CFR 771.135 (i)). The revised EA or EA Errata/final Section 4(f) evaluation would then be required to specifically address: (1) the reason(s) why the alternatives to the proposed action that would avoid each Section 4(f) property are not feasible and prudent; and, (2) all measures which will be taken to minimize harm to each Section 4(f) property. If a revised EA or EA errata is not required, the final Section 4(f) property evaluation discussion of avoidance alternatives and mitigating measures will be included in the FONSI. Refer to Section 1700 & Section 1800 for specific guidance on preparing or reviewing Section 4(f) evaluations.

MITIGATION PLAN REPORT

A list of environmental commitments (if any) should be developed in conjunction with the preparation of an EA. Refer to Exhibit 300-5 for guidance on the preparation, timing, circulation, and tracking of commitments.

As each project impact is developed in the IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION section, a summary of the mitigation proposed to off set the impact can be included. This does not have to be a detailed section. For instance, if a wetland is to be filled or partially filled, the summary can simply state that additional wetland will be created or enhanced or preserved, as the case may be, in order to attain no net loss of wetland value and function.

In the MITIGATION PLAN REPORT) section, prepare a detailed Mitigation Plan Report. Using the above example, here is an example of what would be contained in the details of the plan: -where the new wetland will be created:

1 The specific location

2 This wetland will be replacing the impacted wetland at a (given) ratio and

will meet the following functions and values:

3 (list those functions and values.)

4-A monitoring plan will include the following schedule and goals: (List them here).

5-The design of the wetland is included as Appendix (x)

APPENDICES (if any)

The appendices should include only information that substantiates an analysis important to the EA (e.g., a biological assessment for threatened or endangered species). Other material should be referenced only (i.e., identify the material and briefly describe its contents).

EXAMPLE OF EA COVER SHEET (SPACE IT OUT TO FIT PAGE)

ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

FOR

PROJECT NO. IM-90-1(208)15

KEY NO. 8391

I-90, SHERMAN AVENUE TO WOLFLODGE

KOOTENAI COUNTY

SUBMITTED BY

ITD DISTRICT 1

SEPTEMBER 20, 2002

_______________________ ___________

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION Date

Exhibit 300-2 - CEQ Guidance on Scoping – Sec.1501.7

Sec. 1501.7 Scoping. There shall be an early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed and for identifying the significant issues related to a proposed action. This process shall be termed scoping. As soon as practicable after its decision to prepare an environmental impact statement and before the scoping process the lead agency shall publish a notice of intent (Sec. 1508.22) in the Federal Register except as provided in Sec. 1507.3(e).

(a) As part of the scoping process the lead agency shall:

1. Invite the participation of affected Federal, State, and local agencies, any affected Indian tribe, the proponent of the action, and other interested persons (including those who might not be in accord with the action on environmental grounds), unless there is a limited exception under Sec. 1507.3(c). An agency may give notice in accordance with Sec. 1506.6.

2. Determine the scope (Sec. 1508.25) and the significant issues to be analyzed in depth in the environmental impact statement.

3. Identify and eliminate from detailed study the issues which are not significant or which have been covered by prior environmental review (Sec. 1506.3), narrowing the discussion of these issues in the statement to a brief presentation of why they will not have a significant effect on the human environment or providing a reference to their coverage elsewhere.

4. Allocate assignments for preparation of the environmental impact statement among the lead and cooperating agencies, with the lead agency retaining responsibility for the statement.

5. Indicate any public environmental assessments and other environmental impact statements that are being or will be prepared that are related to but are not part of the scope of the impact statement under consideration.

6. Identify other environmental review and consultation requirements so the lead and cooperating agencies may prepare other required analyses and studies concurrently with, and integrated with, the environmental impact statement as provided in Sec. 1502.25.

7. Indicate the relationship between the timing of the preparation of environmental analyses and the agency's tentative planning and decision-making schedule.

(b) As part of the scoping process the lead agency may:

Set page limits on environmental documents (Sec. 1502.7).
Set time limits (Sec. 1501.8).
Adopt procedures under Sec. 1507.3 to combine its environmental assessment process with its scoping process.
Hold an early scoping meeting or meetings that may be integrated with any other early planning meeting the agency has. Such a scoping meeting will often be appropriate when the impacts of a particular action are confined to specific sites.

(c) An agency shall revise the determinations made under paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section if substantial changes are made later in the proposed action, or if significant new circumstances or information arise which bear on the proposal or its impacts.

Scope consists of the range of actions, alternatives, and impacts to be considered in an environmental impact statement. The scope of an individual statement may depend on its relationships to other statements (Secs.1502.20 and 1508.28). To determine the scope of environmental impact statements, agencies shall consider 3 types of actions, 3 types of alternatives, and 3 types of impacts. They include:

(a) Actions (other than unconnected single actions) which may be:

Connected actions, which means that they are closely related and therefore should be discussed in the same impact statement. Actions are connected if they:

(i) Automatically trigger other actions that may require environmental impact statements.

(ii) Cannot or will not proceed unless other actions are taken previously or simultaneously.

(iii) Are interdependent parts of a larger action and depend on the larger action for their justification.

Cumulative actions, which when viewed with other proposed actions have cumulatively significant impacts and should therefore be discussed in the same impact statement.
Similar actions, which when viewed with other reasonably foreseeable or proposed agency actions, have similarities that provide a basis for evaluating their environmental consequences together, such as common timing or geography. An agency may wish to analyze these actions in the same impact statement. It should do so when the best way to assess adequately the combined impacts of similar actions or reasonable alternatives to such actions is to treat them in a single impact statement.

(b) Alternatives, which include:

4. No action alternative.

5. Other reasonable courses of actions.

6. Mitigation measures (not in the proposed action).

Exhibit 300-3 40 CFR PART 1508 - TERMINOLOGY AND INDEX

Section 1508.1 Terminology.

The terminology of this part shall be uniform throughout the Federal Government.

Section 1508.2 Act.

"Act" means the National Environmental Policy Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.) which is also referred to as "NEPA."

Section 1508.3 Affecting.

"Affecting" means will or may have an effect on.

Section 1508.4 Categorical exclusion.

"Categorical Exclusion" means a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and which have been found to have no such effect in procedures adopted by a Federal agency in implementation of these regulations (Section 1507.3) and for which, therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. An agency may decide in its procedures or otherwise, to prepare environmental assessments for the reasons stated in Section 1508.9 even though it is not required to do so. Any procedures under this section shall provide for extraordinary circumstances in which a normally excluded action may have a significant environmental effect.

Section 1508.5 Cooperating agency.

"Cooperating Agency" means any Federal agency other than a lead agency that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved in a proposal (or a reasonable alternative) for legislation or other major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. The selection and responsibilities of a cooperating agency are described in Section 1501.6. A State or local agency of similar qualifications or, when the effects are on a reservation, an Indian Tribe, may by agreement with the lead agency become a cooperating agency.

Section 1508.6 Council.

"Council" means the Council on Environmental Quality established by Title II of the Act.

Section 1508.7 Cumulative Impact.

"Cumulative impact" is the impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.

Section 1508.8 Effects.

"Effects" include:

(a) Direct effects, which are caused by the action and occur at the same time and place.

(b) Indirect effects, which are caused by the action and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect effects may include growth inducing effects and other effects related to induced changes in the pattern of land use, population density or growth rate, and related effects on air and water and other natural systems, including ecosystems. Effects and impacts as used in these regulations are synonymous. Effects include ecological (such as the effects on natural resources and on the components, structures, and functioning of affected ecosystems), aesthetic, historic, cultural, economic, social, or health, whether direct, indirect, or cumulative. Effects may also include those resulting from actions that may have both beneficial and detrimental effects, even if on balance the agency believes that the effect will be beneficial.

Section 1508.9 Environmental Assessment.

"Environmental Assessment":

(a) Means a concise public document for which a Federal agency is responsible that serves to:

(1) Briefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement or a finding of no significant impact.

(2) Aid an agency's compliance with the Act when no environmental impact statement is necessary.

(3) Facilitate preparation of a statement when one is necessary.

(b) Shall include brief discussions of the need for the proposal, of alternatives as required by sec. 102(2)(E), of the environmental impacts of the proposed action and alternatives, and a listing of agencies and persons consulted.

Section 1508.10 Environmental Document.

"Environmental document" includes the documents specified in Section 1508.9 (environmental assessment), Section 1508.11 (environmental impact statement), Section 1508.13 (finding of no significant impact), and Section 1508.22 (notice of intent).

Section 1508.11 Environmental Impact Statement.

"Environmental Impact Statement" means a detailed written statement as required by sec. 102(2)(C) of the Act.

Section 1508.12 Federal Agency.

"Federal agency" means all agencies of the Federal Government. It does not mean the Congress, the Judiciary, or the President, including the performance of staff functions for the President in his Executive Office. It also includes for purposes of these regulations States and units of general local government and Indian tribes assuming NEPA responsibilities under section 104(h) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974.

Section 1508.13 Finding of no significant impact.

"Finding of No Significant Impact" means a document by a Federal agency briefly presenting the reasons why an action, not otherwise excluded (Section 1508.4), will not have a significant effect on the human environment and for which an environmental impact statement therefore will not be prepared. It shall include the environmental assessment or a summary of it and shall note any other environmental documents related to it (Section 1501.7(a)(5)). If the assessment is included, the finding need not repeat any of the discussion in the assessment but may incorporate it by reference.

Section 1508.14 Human Environment.

"Human Environment" shall be interpreted comprehensively to include the natural and physical environment and the relationship of people with that environment. (See the definition of "effects" (Section 1508.8).) This means that economic or social effects are not intended by themselves to require preparation of an environmental impact statement. When an environmental impact statement is prepared and economic or social and natural or physical environmental effects are interrelated, then the environmental impact statement will discuss all of these effects on the human environment.

Section 1508.15 Jurisdiction By Law.

"Jurisdiction by law" means agency authority to approve, veto, or finance all or part of the proposal.

Section 1508.16 Lead Agency.

"Lead Agency" means the agency or agencies preparing or having taken primary responsibility for preparing the environmental impact statement.

Section 1508.17 Legislation.

"Legislation" includes a bill or legislative proposal to Congress developed by or with the significant cooperation and support of a Federal agency, but does not include requests for appropriations. The test for significant cooperation is whether the proposal is in fact predominantly that of the agency rather than another source. Drafting does not by itself constitute significant cooperation. Proposals for legislation include requests for ratification of treaties. Only the agency that has primary responsibility for the subject matter involved will prepare a legislative environmental impact statement.

Section 1508.18 Major Federal Action.

"Major Federal action" includes actions with effects that may be major and which are potentially subject to Federal control and responsibility. Major reinforces but does not have a meaning independent of significantly (Section 1508.27). Actions include the circumstance where the responsible officials fail to act and that failure to act is reviewable by courts or administrative tribunals under the Administrative Procedure Act or other applicable law as agency action.

(a) Actions include new and continuing activities, including projects and programs entirely or partly financed, assisted, conducted, regulated, or approved by federal agencies; new or revised agency rules, regulations, plans, policies, or procedures; and legislative proposals (Sections 1506.8, 1508.17). Actions do not include funding assistance solely in the form of general revenue sharing funds, distributed under the State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972, 31 U.S.C. 1221 et seq., with no Federal agency control over the subsequent use of such funds. Actions do not include bringing judicial or administrative civil or criminal enforcement actions.

(b) Federal actions tend to fall within one of the following categories:

(1) Adoption of official policy, such as rules, regulations, and interpretations adopted pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.; treaties and international conventions or agreements; formal documents establishing an agency's policies which will result in or substantially alter agency programs.

(2) Adoption of formal plans, such as official documents prepared or approved by federal agencies that guide or prescribe alternative uses of federal resources, upon which future agency actions will be based.

(3) Adoption of programs, such as a group of concerted actions to implement a specific policy or plan; systematic and connected agency decisions allocating agency resources to implement a specific statutory program or executive directive.

(4) Approval of specific projects, such as construction or management activities located in a defined geographic area. Projects include actions approved by permit or other regulatory decision as well as federal and federally assisted activities.

Section 1508.19 Matter.

"Matter" includes for purposes of Part 1504:

(a) With respect to the Environmental Protection Agency, any proposed legislation, project, action or regulation as those terms are used in section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7609).

(b) With respect to all other agencies, any proposed major federal action to which section 102(2)(C) of NEPA applies.

Section 1508.20 Mitigation.

"Mitigation" includes:

(a) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.

(b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation.

(d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action.

(e) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.

Section 1508.21 NEPA process.

"NEPA process" means all measures necessary for compliance with the requirements of section 2 and Title I of NEPA.

Section 1508.22 Notice of intent.

"Notice of Intent" means a notice that an environmental impact statement will be prepared and considered. The notice shall briefly:

(a) Describe the proposed action and possible alternatives.

(b) Describe the agency's proposed scoping process including whether, when, and where any scoping meeting will be held.

(c) State the name and address of a person within the agency who can answer questions about the proposed action and the environmental impact statement.

Section 1508.23 Proposal.

"Proposal" exists at that stage in the development of an action when an agency subject to the Act has a goal and is actively preparing to make a decision on one or more alternative means of accomplishing that goal and the effects can be meaningfully evaluated. Preparation of an environmental impact statement on a proposal should be timed (Section 1502.5) so that the final statement may be completed in time for the statement to be included in any recommendation or report on the proposal. A proposal may exist in fact as well as by agency declaration that one exists.

Section 1508.24 Referring Agency.

"Referring agency" means the federal agency that has referred any matter to the Council after a determination that the matter is unsatisfactory from the standpoint of public health or welfare or environmental quality.

Section 1508.25 Scope.

Scope consists of the range of actions, alternatives, and impacts to be considered in an environmental impact statement. The scope of an individual statement may depend on its relationships to other statements (Sections 1502.20 and 1508.28). To determine the scope of environmental impact statements, agencies shall consider 3 types of actions, 3 types of alternatives, and 3 types of impacts. They include:

(a) Actions (other than unconnected single actions) which may be:

(1) Connected actions, which means that they are closely related and therefore should be discussed in the same impact statement. Actions are connected if they:

(i) Automatically trigger other actions that may require environmental impact statements.

(ii) Cannot or will not proceed unless other actions are taken previously or simultaneously.

(iii) Are interdependent parts of a larger action and depend on the larger action for their justification.

(2) Cumulative actions, which when viewed with other proposed actions have cumulatively significant impacts and should therefore be discussed in the same impact statement.

(3) Similar actions, which when viewed with other reasonably foreseeable or proposed agency actions, have similarities that provide a basis for evaluating their environmental consequences together, such as common timing or geography. An agency may wish to analyze these actions in the same impact statement. It should do so when the best way to assess adequately the combined impacts of similar actions or reasonable alternatives to such actions is to treat them in a single impact statement.

(b) Alternatives, which include:

(1) No action alternative.

(2) Other reasonable courses of actions.

(3) Mitigation measures (not in the proposed action).

(1) Direct;

(2) Indirect;

(2) Cumulative.

Section 1508.26 Special Expertise.

"Special expertise" means statutory responsibility, agency mission, or related program experience.

Section 1508.27 Significantly.

"Significantly" as used in NEPA requires considerations of both context and intensity:

(a) Context- This means that the significance of an action must be analyzed in several contexts such as society as a whole (human, national), the affected region, the affected interests, and the locality. Significance varies with the setting of the proposed action. For instance, in the case of a site-specific action, significance would usually depend upon the effects in the locale rather than in the world as a whole. Both short- and long-term effects are relevant.

(b) Intensity- This refers to the severity of impact. Responsible officials must bear in mind that more than one agency may make decisions about partial aspects of a major action. The following should be considered in evaluating intensity:

(1) Impacts that may be both beneficial and adverse. A significant effect may exist even if the Federal agency believes that on balance the effect will be beneficial.

(2) The degree to which the proposed action affects public health or safety.

(3) Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to historic or cultural resources, park lands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas.

(4) The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly controversial.

(5) The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks.

(6) The degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration.

(7) Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts. Significance exists if it is reasonable to anticipate a cumulatively significant impact on the environment. Significance cannot be avoided by terming an action temporary or by breaking it down into small component parts.

(8) The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or may cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources.

(9) The degree to which the action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened species or its habitat that has been determined to be critical under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. (10) Whether the action threatens a violation of Federal, State, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment.

1508.28 Tiering.

"Tiering" refers to the coverage of general matters in broader environmental impact statements (such as national program or policy statements) with subsequent narrower statements or environmental analyses (such as regional or basin wide program statements or ultimately site-specific statements) incorporating by reference the general discussions and concentrating solely on the issues specific to the statement subsequently prepared. Tiering is appropriate when the sequence of statements or analyses is:

(a) From a program, plan, or policy environmental impact statement to a program, plan, or policy statement or analysis of lesser scope or to a site-specific statement or analysis.

(b) From an environmental impact statement on a specific action at an early stage (such as need and site selection) to a supplement (which is preferred) or a subsequent statement or analysis at a later stage (such as environmental mitigation). Tiering in such cases is appropriate when it helps the lead agency to focus on the issues that are ripe for decision and exclude from consideration issues already decided or not yet ripe.

Exhibit 300-4. Technical Guidance 6640.8A

U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration

TECHNICAL ADVISORY

GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING AND PROCESSING
ENVIRONMENTAL AND SECTION 4(F) DOCUMENTS

T 6640.8A
October 30, 1987

1. PURPOSE. To provide guidance to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) field offices and to project applicants on the preparation and processing of environmental and Section 4(f) documents.

CANCELLATION. Technical Advisory T 6640.8, "Guidance Material for the Preparation of Environmental Documents," dated February 24, 1982, is canceled effective on November 27, 1987.
APPLICABILITY

a. This material is not regulatory. It has been developed to provide guidance for uniformity and consistency in the format, content, and processing of the various environmental studies and documents pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 23 U.S.C.109(h) and 23 U.S.C. 138 (Section 4(f) of the DOT Act) and the reporting requirements of 23 U.S.C. 128.

The guidance is limited to the format, content and processing of NEPA and Section 4(f) studies and documents. It should be used in combination with a knowledge and understanding of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508), FHWA's Environmental Impact and Related Procedures (23 CFR 771) and other environmental statutes and orders (see Appendix A).
This guidance should not be used until November 27, 1987, the effective date of the 1987 revisions to 23 CFR 771.

Ali F. Sevin
Director, Office of
Environmental Policy

GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING AND PROCESSING ENVIRONMENTAL AND SECTION 4(F) DOCUMENTS

Background

An earlier edition of this advisory (dated February 24, 1982) placed major emphasis on environmental impact statements (EISs) and provided limited guidance on environmental assessments (EAs) and other environmental studies needed for a categorical exclusion (CE) determination or a finding of no significant impact (FONSI). The revised guidance gives expanded coverage to CE determinations, EAs, FONSIs, EISs, supplemental EISs, reevaluations, and Section 4(f) evaluations. This material is not regulatory. It does, however, provide for uniformity and consistency in the documentation of CEs and the development of environmental and Section 4(f) documents.

The FHWA subscribes to the philosophy that the goal of the NEPA process is better decisions and not more documentation. Environmental documents should be concise, clear, and to the point, and should be supported by evidence that the necessary analyses have been made. They should focus on the important impacts and issues with the less important areas only briefly discussed. The length of EAs should normally be less than 15 pages and EISs should normally be less than 150 pages for most proposed actions and not more than 300 pages for the most complex proposals. The use of technical reports for various subject areas would help reduce the size of the documents.

The FHWA considers the early coordination process to be a valuable tool in determining the scope of issues to be addressed and in identifying and focusing on the proposed action's important issues. This process normally entails the exchange of information with appropriate Federal, State and local agencies, and the public from inception of the proposed action to preparation of the environmental document or to completion of environmental studies for applicable CEs. Formal scoping meetings may also be held where such meetings would assist in the preparation of the environmental document. The role of other agencies and other environmental review and consultation requirements should be established during scoping. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has issued several guidance publications on NEPA and its regulations as follows: (1) "Questions and Answers about the NEPA Regulations," March 30, 1981; (2) "Scoping Guidance," April 30, 1981; and (3) "Guidance Regarding NEPA Regulations," July 28, 1983. This non-regulatory guidance is used by FHWA in preparing and processing environmental documents. Copies of the CEQ guidance are available in the FHWA Office of Environmental Policy (HEV-11).

Note, highway agency (HA) is used throughout this document to refer to a State and local highway agency responsible for conducting environmental studies and preparing environmental documents and to FHWA's Office of Direct Federal Programs when that office acts in a similar capacity.

I. CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION (CE)

Categorical exclusions are actions or activities which meet the definition in 23 CFR 771.117(a) and, based on FHWA's past experience, do not have significant environmental effects. The CEs are divided into two groups based on the action's potential for impacts. The level of documentation necessary for a particular CE depends on the group the action falls under as explained below.

A. Documentation of Applicability

The first group is a list of 20 categories of actions in 23 CFR 771.117(c) which experience has shown never or almost never cause significant environmental impacts. These categories are non-construction actions (e.g., planning, grants for training and research programs) or limited construction activities (e.g., pedestrian facilities, landscaping, fencing). These actions are automatically classified as CEs, and except where unusual circumstances are brought to FHWA's attention, do not require approval or documentation by FHWA. However, other environmental laws may still apply. For example, installation of traffic signals in a historic district may require compliance with Section 106, or a proposed noise barrier which would use land protected by Section 4(f) would require preparation of a Section 4(f) evaluation (23 CFR 771.135(i)). In most cases, information is available from planning and programming documents for the FHWA Division Office to determine the applicability of other environmental laws. However, any necessary documentation should be discussed and developed cooperatively by the highway agency (HA) and the FHWA.

The second group consists of actions with a higher potential for impacts than the first group, but due to minor environmental impacts still meets the criteria for categorical exclusions. In 23 CFR 771.117(d), the regulation lists examples of 12 actions which past experience has found appropriate for CE classification. However, the second group is not limited to these 12 examples. Other actions with a similar scope of work may qualify as CEs. For actions in this group, site location is often a key factor. Some of these actions on certain sites may involve unusual circumstances or result in significant adverse environmental impacts. Because of the potential for impacts, these actions require some information to be provided by the HA so that the FHWA can determine if the CE classification is proper (23 CFR 771.117(d)). The level of information to be provided should be commensurate with the action's potential for adverse environmental impacts. Where adverse environmental impacts are likely to occur, the level of analysis should be sufficient to define the extent of impacts, identify appropriate mitigation measures, and address known and foreseeable public and agency concerns. As a minimum, the information should include a description of the proposed action and, as appropriate, its immediate surrounding area, a discussion of any specific areas of environmental concern (e.g., Section 4(f), wetlands, relocations), and a list of other Federal actions required, if any, for the proposal.

The documentation of the decision to advance an action in the second group as a CE can be accomplished by one of the following methods:

1. Minor actions from the list of examples:

Minor construction projects or approval actions need only minimum documentation. Where project-specific information for such minor construction projects is included with the Section 105 program and clearly shows that the project is one of the 12 listed examples in Section 771.117(d), the approval of the Section 105 program can be used to approve the projects as CEs. Similarly, the three approval actions on the list (examples (6), (7) and (12)) should not normally require detailed document